SynthesisBMC pregnancy and childbirth2022
Assessment of evidence on reported non-genetic risk factors of congenital heart defects: the updated umbrella review.
Synthesis in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Does early pregnancy exposure to macrolide antibiotics lead to major birth defects? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- Maternal modifiable factors and risk of congenital heart defects: systematic review and causality assessment.BMJ open · 2024Pooled it
- Combined effects of maternal periconceptional environmental exposures and infant cardiac transcription factor polymorphisms on congenital heart disease risk.Annals of medicine · 2026Article
- Prenatal and Maternal Contributors to Disease Severity in Congenital Heart Disease.Maternal and child health journal · 2026Article
- The aetiology distribution of birth defects based on the China Birth Cohort Study.BMJ paediatrics open · 2025Article
- Longitudinal metabolic profiling of women using selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors during pregnancy.Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society · 2025Article
- Identification and Functional Characterization of a NovelChildren (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- 2025 Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics: A Report of US and Global Data From the American Heart Association.Circulation · 2025Review
- Risk factors of under-five and infant mortality: An umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.Journal of global health · 2024Review
- Predictive model for congenital heart disease in children of Pakistan by using structural equation modeling.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2024Article
- Article
- 2024 Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics: A Report of US and Global Data From the American Heart Association.Circulation · 2024Review
- Article
- Discovery ofBiology · 2023Article
- Article
- Considering the Genetic Architecture of Hypoplastic Left Heart Syndrome.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2022Article
- Dietary Quality during Pregnancy and Congenital Heart Defects.Nutrients · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCongenital heart defect (CHD) is the leading cause of birth defects globally, which results in a great disease burden. It is still imperative to detect the risk factors of CHD. This umbrella review aimed to comprehensively summarize the evidence and grade the evidence of the associations between non-genetic risk factors and CHD.
methodsDatabases including Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and four Chinese databases were searched from inception to 18 Jan 2022. The reference lists of systematic reviews (SR) and meta-analyses (MA) were screened, which aimed to explore the non-genetic risk factors of CHD. Subsequently, titles and abstracts of identified records and full texts of selected SR/MA were screened by two independent reviewers based on predefined eligibility criteria. A priori developed extraction form was used to abstract relative data following the PRISMA 2020 and MOOSE guidelines. The risk of bias was assessed with the AMSTAR2 instrument. Data were synthesized using fixed-effects and random-effects meta-analyses, respectively. Finally, the evidence on the association of non-genetic risk factors and CHD was graded using Ioannidis's five-class evidence grade.
resultsA total of 56 SRs, encompassing 369 MAs, were identified. The risk factors included relative factors on air pollution, reproductive-related factors, parental age and BMI, parental life habits, working and dwelling environment, maternal drug exposure, and maternal disease. Based on AMSTAR2 criteria, only 16% (9/56) of SRs were classified as "Moderate". One hundred and two traceable positive association MAs involving 949 component individual studies were included in further analysis and grading of evidence. Family genetic history, number of abortions, maternal obesity, especially moderate or severe obesity, decoration materials, harmful chemicals, noise during pregnancy, folic acid supplementation, SSRIs, SNRIs, any antidepressants in the first trimester, maternal DM (including both PGDM and GDM), and gestational hypertension were convincing and highly suggestive factors for CHD. After sensitivity analyses based on cohort studies, some grades of evidence changed.
conclusionThe present umbrella review will provide evidence-based information for women of childbearing age before or during pregnancy to prevent CHD. In addition, sensitivity analysis based on cohort studies showed the changed evidence levels. Therefore, future SR/MA should concern the sensitivity analysis based on prospective birth cohort studies and case-control studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.